first wide line: when the gemora defines kol sheina reuya ledira as the height of the upper succa is less than 10, this poses a problem between the tanna kama and shmuel.
rav dimi's answer also leaves shmuel "in trouble" with the tanna kama.
i understand that the gemora's answer, eicha beinaihu, (and the specific case of eicha beinaihu is NOT relevant at the moment) the difference between rabbi yehuda and the tanna kama, serves two purposes:
1. to preserve the dispute in the mishna between rabbi yehuda and the tanna kama.
2. to "get shmuel" off the ropes, that is, there should be NO more difficulty between his shita and the tanna kama.
please help me understand how eicha beinaihu resolves the difficulty between shmuel and the rabbanim (tanna kama).
in appreciation,
yosef mackler, jerusalem, israel
Once we have established that the Perush of Diyurim is not Asarah we have already gotten Shmuel "off the ropes", for both Tana Kama and Rav Yehudah hold that you need ten in order to Pasul like Shmuel. The Ika Beinahu is just coming to clarify the difficulty the Gemara was having that the Tanna Kama should Pasul even if it cannot hold Karim at all, in which case why do we consider the Elyonah a Sukah? To this the Gemara answers that the Tana Kama admits that it must hold but it is sufficient "Al Yedei ha'Dechak;" however, the whole discussion is only with regard to a ten-Tefach high (or higher) Elyonah.
D. Zupnik
(Agassi 56, Har Nof)